The United States is abandoning its traditional role as the anchor of the liberal world order — a set of norms, rules, customs and international institutions designed to maintain global stability and foster peaceful interchange between states.
From announcing its intention to withdraw from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Human Rights Council to threatening allies — including Canada — with annexation and damaging tariffs, U.S. President Donald Trump has launched an assault on the liberal world order that upholds the post-1945 international system.
Under these circumstances, it’s more urgent than ever that Canada clarifies its vision in world affairs and accepts its responsibility to sustain the rules-based global order. By looking into the past, we can see what Canada can do in the present.
Read more: Like dictators before him, Trump threatens international peace and security
How Canada made a difference
The U.S. isn’t the only country with a vested interest in maintaining the liberal international order — even if it has been the only nation with the will and capacity to serve as its safeguard.
Canada was also present at the creation of the UN in 1945. They, too, played a fundamental part in the development of its specialized agencies — such as the WHO and the International Civil Aviation Organization.
In fact, Canada has been an engaged member of the international community. The country played a leading role in establishing the UN Emergency Force during the Suez Crisis, fighting apartheid in South Africa and building a coalition to ban anti-personnel land mines in the 1990s, to name a few examples.
Canada has done so because it’s been in the best interest of the country. A liberal, rules-based international order is a framework in which Canada can make a meaningful difference in global affairs disproportionate to its limited size and capabilities.
It also makes for a more prosperous, stable and peaceful world. One where norms, rules and institutions constrain aggressive or malevolent world leaders and facilitates co-operation on global problems.
But what can lessons from the past offer Canada in sustaining global order in an “America First” world. This is a policy espoused by the Trump administration that is focused inwards. It approaches international affairs as a transactional, zero-sum game.
Learning from the past
First, Canada is at its most effective when Canadians act in unison towards a common goal.
During the Ethiopian famine in the 1980s, Canadians of all stripes and levels of government worked in tandem to organize a truly national response to alleviate the humanitarian crisis. Regular citizens contributed more than $30 million — potentially saving over 700,000 people from starvation.
This domestic political consensus also provided the requisite support for the federal government to co-ordinate an international famine relief effort. This was despite the resistance of Canada’s major allies in the U.S. and the U.K., due to the Marxist orientation of the Ethiopian government.
Granted, few international causes offer such grounds for unity. Political polarization has only made this type of unity more difficult. And yet, as recent events (such as Trump’s threat to coerce Canada into becoming the 51st state) make clear, Canadians are willing to put aside their differences and rally together when there’s a coherent vision for the country rooted in its values and aspirations.
Second, Canada needs to work closely with like-minded states through multilateral institutions — such as the United Nations and the Commonwealth. Under Brian Mulroney’s Progressive Conservative government, Canada relied on its membership in nearly every major international association to build and maintain the global coalition against South African apartheid.
Read more: Brian Mulroney's tough stand against apartheid is one of his most important legacies
Australia, India, Zambia and Zimbabwe emerged as key partners. Such efforts entailed both political and economic costs. But there was a reason why one of Nelson Mandela’s first visits following his release from prison in 1990 was to Canada.
By redoubling its engagement in international organizations, Canada can punch above its weight in world affairs and shape global priorities. It also provides a counter to the influence of the United States in Canadian foreign policy.
Third, the U.S. is more than its president. Canada can still cultivate ties with Americans beyond the White House. Returning to the Mulroney government, Ottawa’s efforts to persuade the Ronald Reagan administration to negotiate restrictions on emissions resulting in acid rain were unsuccessful.
Nonetheless, by lobbying congressional leaders in impacted states and partnering with environmental non-governmental organizations, Canada and the U.S. eventually agreed to the 1991 Air Quality Agreement.
Surviving hostile administrations
Canada should also be realistic about the degree to which it can diversify its economic and diplomatic relationships outside of the U.S.
In the early 1970s, President Richard Nixon imposed a 10 per cent surcharge on Canadian imports. Then, just as it is now, Ottawa looked for alternative markets to offset Canada’s dependency on the Americans. These initiatives ultimately failed to materialize — but the surcharge was rescinded. Canada-U.S. relations ultimately survived the Nixon administration.
Similarly, while Trump has offered a stark reminder that Canada needs to take an active role in sustaining the rules-based international order on which it depends, the ties that bind the two countries together are deeper and longer-lasting than any one administration or government.
Even so, with a world in chaos, Canada needs to step up to defend international norms and institutions. It has done so in the past and can do so again — provided it develops a coherent foreign policy strategy moving forward.
Daniel Manulak receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
